Letter to the Editor: A language loses something when its writing system disappears

Thank you, Michael Merdoyo, for your response to my op-ed. I appreciate that we can have a respectful discussion about an issue that is crucial to the future of our people. We share the same goal: for the Assyrian/Suryoyo people to live on. But we draw different conclusions about how to get there.

You believe that a common Latin alphabet is a necessary tool for preserving the language in the diaspora. I believe that the solution is not to give the Latin alphabet a greater role, but to strengthen the use of our own alphabet and make it more accessible to the next generation.

You write that the greatest threat is that fewer and fewer people speak the language. We agree on that. But the solution to that cannot be to gradually reduce the use of our own writing system. Instead, the focus should be on improving the teaching of Assyrian/Suryoyo through more native-language teachers, modern teaching materials, digital tools, children’s books, and cultural initiatives where the alphabet is used naturally.

Today, we have technological capabilities that previous generations did not have. Apps, social media, and digital learning make it entirely possible to improve both language skills and writing skills at the same time.

It is a fact that we live in the diaspora. But that does not mean we have to abandon parts of our cultural heritage. On the contrary, we have an even greater responsibility to preserve what we have left. Our alphabet is not just a writing system, but a direct link to our history, our religious texts, and our literature.

I do not share the view that a Latin alphabet is essential for the survival of a language. History shows, rather, that when an indigenous writing system is displaced in everyday use, it risks gradually disappearing from the lives of future generations.

The greatest threat to the Assyrian/Suryoyo language is not a lack of Latin-based tools, but a lack of structures that strengthen our own alphabet in practice.

That is why we do not need to choose between language and writing. We need to strengthen both at the same time. A language lives through its speakers, but it also preserves its memory through its written form. If we lose one, we risk weakening the other.

I hope this debate will lead to more concrete initiatives to strengthen the teaching of Assyrian/Suryoyo and ensure that both the language and the alphabet are passed on to future generations.